A small pro‐national‐ID group called “Keep Identities Safe” is dancing a little jig because New Hampshire Governor Maggie Hassan (R) has signed legislation to move her state closer to compliance with our national ID law, the REAL ID Act.
In a blog post—apparently their first ever (so that link will be broken if they blog again)—they try to declare the end of the REAL ID Rebellion. I often say it was founded when Rep. Neal Kurk (R‐Weare) inveighed against the national ID law in a 2006 speech on the floor of the New Hampshire House of Representatives.
But the heart of the matter is the denial that REAL ID is a national ID law. The New Hampshire legislation says, “Any records received pursuant to this paragraph shall not be used, further transferred, or otherwise made available to any other person or entity for the purpose of creating or enhancing a federal identification database.”
How can New Hampshire offer a REAL ID option and not participate in a national identification database?
It’s a good question, so I’ll cite again directly to the terms of the REAL ID law, which requires states to:
(12) Provide electronic access to all other States to information contained in the motor vehicle database of the State.
(13) Maintain a State motor vehicle database that contains, at a minimum –
(A) all data fields printed on drivers’ licenses and identification cards issued by the State; and
(B) motor vehicle drivers’ histories, including motor vehicle violations, suspensions, and points on licenses.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has temporarily written that requirement out of the law in an effort to get states committed to REAL ID. When enough states are in the tank, the agency will move the compliance goalposts and require states to begin sharing their drivers’ data via the nationwide database system that the law specifically requires. The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators is currently touting on its website that Iowa has signed up to its “State‐to‐State Verification Service.”
The New Hampshire legislation also suffers from poor draftsmanship. New Hampshire’s motor vehicle bureaucrats can sign their state up to AAMVA’s information‐sharing system simply by allowing themselves to believe that they are not doing so “for the purpose of creating or enhancing a federal identification database.” Governor Hassan has left New Hampshirites unprotected from seeing their data shared nationally.
Notably, the REAL ID law does not exempt “non‐federal” licenses from the information‐sharing requirement. New Hampshirites who choose that option will still have their information shared nationally.
Has the REAL ID Rebellion ended? Perhaps. DMV bureaucrats and their pro‐national‐ID allies at “Keep Identities Safe” have been working for years to wear down and evade state legislatures’ resistance to the national ID law. They have had some success in growing the power of the federal government in yet another direction.
Should this be a source of pride? A national ID is a poor security tool that wastes taxpayer dollars, upsets the constitutionally prescribed state‐federal balance of power, and compromises law‐abiding Americans’ privacy and liberties. The move toward national ID compliance in New Hampshire is probably not something to dance a jig about.